NON-STOP PCN from Southend Airport ******* Case Dismissed, Now VCS appealing ********

IamWood

SayNoToPCN said:

As above
Do not repeat your defence.T his is not the time or place to do so

You are objecting to their grounds of appeal

1) That the claimant, which has an inhouse legal team and who was represented on the day by a legally qualified individual, conceded during the hearing that "..." (give quote) and this is reflected in line 2 of the judgment which says..... You do not consider it just that, having conceded the point, they are now trying again with a new court

2) That the supposed contract with the landowner the cl;aimant is now including appears to be a false instrument. Then include the Fruitcake details. Pay close attention to the precise names of companies. Do not give your own verison, wehich you did above!

To be clear for my sake: is the abovfe contract 
- new to you now, with the appeal OR
- was it included in their original WS, and the rep was too incompetent to find it?


If the former, then make it clear that the claimant was put to strict proof of their authority and failed to do so . Whatever the error was, and who caused it, it is not just that the burden should now fall on you, an un-rep defendant. 

If the latter, then you can point out that their rep conceded there was no landowner authority, and that incompetnece appears to be a private matter between the rep and the claimant. 

The Latter. The contract (between Southend Airport Ltd. and VCS) was part of VCS's WS. The rep admitted Southend Airport Ltd. is not the landowner but failed to provide the evidence when challenged by the Judge. 

SayNoToPCN

OK, in which case you do not need to comment further on the false instrument, as it is (strictly) not relevant here
I dont get your final; conclusion; he has no evidence to find. The only contract is not with the landowner. 

They are appealing under what ground then? I am confused - they have nothing new to offer, they cant point to anything being missed by the judge, and dont appear to be arguionng a failing in law?

IamWood

SayNoToPCN said:

OK, in which case you do not need to comment further on the false instrument, as it is (strictly) not relevant here
I dont get your final; conclusion; he has no evidence to find. The only contract is not with the landowner. 

They are appealing under what ground then? I am confused - they have nothing new to offer, they cant point to anything being missed by the judge, and dont appear to be arguionng a failing in law?

Please refer Page 15 of this thread for the appealing doc from VCS. Thanks

IamWood

Thanks to all. I've cut off most of the detailed arguments. What about this:

-------------

Dear Sir

 

I am writing to object to the appeal made by the Claimant, Vehicle Control Service (VCS), for claim number XXXXXX.

I believe the Claimant ignored the learned Judge's second line in the Order that dismissed the claim: ‘And upon the Claimant’s representative stating that without such information and evidence the Claimant could not prove this claim’. The legally qualified representative of VCS had the chance to use the arguments (if there is any) but actually conceded at the hearing. Having conceded, they cannot try the case at another court.

I would like to take the opportunity to iterate the following points:

1.     The legally qualified representative of VCS admitted during the hearing on 30/03/2021 that Southend Airport Company Limited is NOT the landowner. When asked by the Judge, ‘who is landowner and where is the evidence’, he failed to provide the evidence: 1) the owner of the land; 2) the landowner had given VCS the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

2.     The contract provided by VCS appears to be a false instrument.

‘THIS AGREEMENT is made on the 11th day of JUNE 2019 between WEHICLE CONTROL SERVICED LIMITED (Company No. 02881745 ) … and LONDON SOUTHEND AIRPORT COMPANY LIMITED (Company No. 02078271) …’

According to Companies House, Company Number 02881745 is for London Southend Airport Company Limited, while Company Number  02078271 is East Midlands International Airport Limited.

3.     No contract can exist between VCS and the Defendant, as the land is not ‘relevant land’. The Airport land is subject to the Airport Byelaws as specified in ‘Section 63’ of the Airports Act 1986. It is also subject to the Southend-on-Sea Municipal Airport Byelaws 1980. Airport Act confirms that the road on which the alleged contravention took place is subject to the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA). The Claimant has no Locus to pursue such case in County Court for breach of contract, whether or not there is one.

4.     I would question the existence of the alleged contract, which the Claimant claims to have been breached by ‘stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited’. The signage is wholly prohibitive and makes no offer of consideration. In the absence of consideration, no contract exists.

5.     The Claimant seeks recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 described as ‘contractual costs and interest’ or ‘Debt collection costs’.  No further justification or breakdown has been provided as required under Civil Procedure Rule 16.4. Previous parking charge cases have found that the parking charge itself is at a level to include the costs of recovery, e.g. Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67.

 6.     Reason for stopping should be considered. The sole reason for the Defendant to stop was to ask an onsite traffic warden for directions (the drop-off point in this case). Photos received from the Claimant show the driver getting into and out of the vehicle. The vehicle stopped for only 30 seconds according to the timestamps.

It is my position that, the Claimant has no standing, or cause of action, to litigate in this matter. Please refer to my Defence and Witness Statement for more details.

 

Redx

6 doesnt make sense to me

Got off and entered the vehicle ??

IamWood

Redx said:

6 doesnt make sense to me

Got off and entered the vehicle ??

Will address this.  There were two photos: one to get off and the other get on.

Thanks!

-- The original post has been updated to reflect the changes. ---

Coupon-mad

Don't reiterate your defence. Certainly not #4, #5 or #6, none of which have anything to do with the application or the reasons why the claim was dismissed.

You are simply meant to be pointing out the fact that the judgment line #2 says that the Claimant's rep conceded the point, as I said.  I say that you can and should write to object to this application.

If the application gets through and the appeal right is granted then as bargepole said, you'll need a skelly.  

But I reckon a letter with a nudge in the right direction, objecting to the application and using the words I suggested about them not having another bite at the cherry might help the Circuit Judge to kick it into touch., And it can't hurt.

Egbert_Nobacon

Seems rather strange that the appeal application doesn’t require a statement of truth.
The courts are quite fussy on this regarding defences and witness statements.

bargepole

Egbert_Nobacon said:

Seems rather strange that the appeal application doesn’t require a statement of truth.
The courts are quite fussy on this regarding defences and witness statements.

Documents which set out factual matters are required to be signed by a Statement of Truth.

Applications, legal submissions, skeleton arguments etc., are not statements of fact, they are essentially legal arguments, and therefore no SoT is necessary.

IamWood

Thank you @Coupon-mad. Will simplify my email as suggested.

My local court asked me to send my email to the Circuit Judge at the County court.